ABSTRACT
This chapter analyzes the effect that adoption of the direct primaries had on electoral competition in the general election via the emergence of experienced House candidates to better illustrate whether this reform legislation ultimately produced "better" candidates. It shows how congressional elections operated prior to the adoption of direct primary reform that was designed to increase citizen participation in the candidate selection process. The chapter discusses direct primaries in conjunction with the Progressive movement before systematically analyzing the consequences of changing the method for selecting candidates for office. It indicates that this reform effort – though not solely responsible for the gradual decline in electoral competition or experienced candidate emergence in House general elections during this time – had the unintended effect of enabling weak candidates to represent their party. Progressive Era reforms, including the adoption of the direct primary, were one of a series of proposals to remedy the situation by reducing the power of party bosses.
